vs. CTR for stable???
Since the relatively few people who voted left us at an impasse on
this, it seems appropriate to try to find a compromise. (I've been
told before that something other than normal RTC-with-3-+1 vs. CTR
isn't the Apache way or something to that effect, but I don't see
--On Monday, December 2, 2002 8:44 AM -0500 Jeff Trawick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about using this for the stable tree?
To merge something from dev to stable (or fix it in stable if the
fix is specific to stable):
either
three committers (including submitter) state their approval
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 05:44, Jeff Trawick wrote:
How about using this for the stable tree?
To merge something from dev to stable (or fix it in stable if the fix
is specific to stable):
either
three committers (including submitter) state their approval
or
four days
Since the relatively few people who voted left us at an impasse on
this, it seems appropriate to try to find a compromise. (I've been
told before that something other than normal RTC-with-3-+1 vs. CTR
isn't the Apache way or something to that effect, but I don't see that
such concerns should
Sounds good to me. I'd prefer adding about four days.
I'm also assuming that you are only talking about big commits
(anything other than a few lines). I wouldn't want things like
typos to have to wait that long. This is grey area though,
and it comes down to personal judgement...so I agree with
Sounds like lazy consensus under RTC to me :)
Aaron Bannert wrote:
Sounds good to me. I'd prefer adding about four days.
I'm also assuming that you are only talking about big commits
(anything other than a few lines). I wouldn't want things like
typos to have to wait that long. This is
